TheTrickster

Members
  • Content Count

    2,841
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Everything posted by TheTrickster

  1. By definition, it isn't even a gift if you have to earn it.
  2. WO is committed to remaining classless - so little chance. Although, there are priests, so not NO chance. If you want genuine classes, there is a WU server with actual genuine classes.
  3. I was going to post something frivolous, but I read Stormblade's post and thought better of it.
  4. So in additional to invisible frogs and ducks, WO now has invisible giant desert pigeons.
  5. Yep. Obviously that is the normal motivation and reason for existence of any given business, but all of the "development" lately seems designed to squeeze more and more from an ever shrinking customer base.
  6. Wait, you got potatoes and a tomato? From another thread: "If you had greater Botanizing skill, you could also find: Potatoes (30.0 skill), tomatoes (30.0 skill), and paprika (30.0 skill)." So you MIGHT get foods that you could farm depending on which node, but we don't even now which nodes have skill gates on items? <sarcasm> Oh, it's just so much more intuitive than the other system </sarcasm>
  7. And a noob will find this logical step of "that animal injured me, so now I need to go poke that animal burrow" intuitive enough to know that burrowing animals, against all real world logic, keep a stash of cotton. Half an hour to gather that? So foraging for food has been seriously nerfed. When I started out, foraging would have skipped the low-weight/low-value stuff (since those are bot) and given that kind of volume of edibles in 5-10 minutes (I know because I lived on forage for days). I will accept this post as saying that the new system isn't as terrible as some think. I certainly can't see in anything that has been provided so far that it is better than the previous system. For the key issue of new player retention, it seems a step backwards.
  8. Well, that seems to nail down the coffin lid on the foraging and botanizing system. It's a shame that the dev lays out a "point" which is nonsensical 5 times by my count, and a "goal" that seems to have not been met and an anti-goal (result to be avoided) that wouldn't have happened. As a newbie it was VERY intuitive to simply forage on a tile for random stuff in the hopes of finding something useful. Geez, that is what foraging is in real life - poke about, see what you find, decide if it is useful. I wonder if anyone that was looking to replace the old forbot had ever actually foraged IRL before - it is an exercise in randomness and serendipity. One does not forage for a flint, for example; one forages for anything useful. The only part that is less than intuitive and consistent is the divide between forage and botanize. In my head I quickly tagged botanize as finding plantables, but wogic rears its head as well. Branches from tree tiles and stuff like that was easy to discover and sensible. Now, I see screenshots of dunes with little piles of snow of them and what looks like weeds that need clearing up. It looks like keeping track of what resources come from what node is a major undertaking - certainly not something a newb is going to enjoy on top of working through early crafting recipes. When an entire system has to have included an off switch for the uglification that should be a clue that it is not enhancing the the game.
  9. I think you mean inferring. Quite possibly this is true, but only if they aren't actually working through it. For example, you saw that they weren't mutually exclusive. Fair call also. Although surely an element of said happy memory is the record of achievement in those two skills. Merging is not merely accepting that the old system is gone for good (which I believe it is) but also taking away players historical achievements. Regarding the comparison to fishing, I think the comparison is a valid one. I post-date the old fishing system, but tried fishing a couple of times. I would say that fishing is currently 3 separate systems of varying degrees of suck. Spear fishing I quickly gave up on - poor return and bad for the spear. Rod fishing was marginal but so needlessly involved that I gave it up long before I was ever going to skill up. Net fishing is boring and time consuming and the returns are not worth it. Result: by the time I was reasonably progressing in the game with serviceable gear I had abandoned fishing completely. There were far better ways to get what I needed so the entire systems may as well not exists for me - they are not a positive at all. If the game for some reason had a requirement that must have fish on any regular basis I simply would have stopped playing. No "making the best of it" in this case, just "not using it".
  10. Nothing false about it. There are 3 options. I didn't say they were mutually exclusive, but you are the one advocating for option 1 to be abandoned, i.e. excluded. Given that if option 1 is indeed abandoned (and why is option one selfish, while expecting people to take option 3 is not selfish) or even merely unsuccessful, you are therefore accepting option 3 as viable, that people who now find the game frustrating to play should continue to play anyway. It is pretty bad that at least one developer has specifically called this an intended improvement and stated that it makes no sense to have the old system anymore, and meanwhile we are counselling each other to "prepare for the worst" as if that is in any way a reasonable approach to content development. For the record, I have no real preference for method (low skills all round, mostly, and not likely to play for a while) but do think it that while some terrain will look a bit better for added variety, other terrain will simply look ugly and cluttered. As for skilling - I have no dog in this fight. 1. It wasn't name calling. It was very specifically addressing the suggestion not the person. 2. "I disagree with your points" <> "you made no points" So, you are acknowledging that your suggestion will make a lot players angry, but you hope that making skilling easier might make them less angry? More and more lately I am noticing that argument in these fora is not aimed at convincing each other but seems rather aimed at winning. It is a bit of a shame, as it moves from collaboration to competition. I am not singling out anyone for inclusion and I am not excluding anyone in particular from this, just making the observation.
  11. One issue here is, if a key enjoyable element of a game, any game, is removed and replaced with something that one finds annoying and frustrating, the options are; lobby to have one's enjoyment of the game restored - explaining why. stop playing continue playing a game that one not only no longer enjoys but that one now finds frustrating and annoying. In other words, behave irrationally in the interests of other people's entertainment. Now, what you are suggesting is to forego option 1. Which of option 2 or 3 are you advocating? EDIT: Yes, snarky. And?
  12. I already edited my post somewhat before your reply loaded for me. Actually, my experience in PvE has been that "Don't worry about losing your gear, we will make sure it is replaced." has pretty much been the norm. I was gifted not one, but THREE complete sets of armour, as well as weapons and tools. With personal belongings, I can only really speak for me, but mostly I wouldn't care much except in the case of feeling bad about losing something someone gave me, or the case of skinned items. But then, if I was playing PvP I either wouldn't skin items or I would accept that someone else may wind up with them.
  13. Actually, I pretty strongly disagree with this. Both play types have both the selfless and the selfish and everything in between. The description above seems to be more describing the difference between a free community and a communist one. As a PvEer, I collect things only to either enable me to play they way I want (exploring and mountain climbing) or to give them to anyone else who needs them. In my travels I use many highways (made for the common benefit) and pass many guard towers (made for the common benefit). I am a citizen of a deed within an alliance, where pretty much everyone pitches in their surplus to provide for anyone who needs it. Those who are not community minded in PvE are considered hermits at the best end of the spectrum and toxic at the worst end - depending on whether they are simply keeping to themselves or actively aggravating. The PvP description seems to be saying that your own character is a meaningless drone either churning out resources for "the kingdom" or going to fight for "the kingdom". I would have considered playing PvP but if this is actually what it is, then I will pass. I am sure that isn't what is meant to be conveyed, but that is the impression this would give me.
  14. Probably. At least IMO. I don't think I ever saw PvP as toxic - or at least any more so than PvE - but there is always a few of "that guy" and getting ganked is just demoralizing and demotivating. It demonstrates in no uncertain fashion that you can't compete and at the same time shows how hard it is going to be to get competitive.
  15. And just like that, the player base has been divided into those who want the pre-existing system and those who want the new system.
  16. I think that may well be the key couple of complaints - the new system is sufficiently different in method, character gains and resource gains that it should not have been considered a replacement of the pre-existing system. There are so many activities in Wurm where there is a choice of methods depending on what you are trying to achieve that keeping the existing for/bot should have been a no-brainer. Oddly, the new system - items appearing in order to cue you that something may be found there - is very much like what I long ago suggested as a genuine exploration mechanic, although what I suggested was for the occurrence to be rare and the reward more special.
  17. See how you criticized the doing of a thing and then did the thing? That has a name.
  18. Thank you for reiterating my point for me. Indeed, I would not necessarily prefer to have to get orange sprouts only by foraging, but when there are no handy oranges trees, foraging is a pretty good way to turn up a sprout. Orange trees are now ANOTHER source of orange sprouts, not THE source. The whole point is that trees with sprouts could be implemented without having to bin foraging or remove orange sprouts from the loot table. Do you really not see how it works that the PLAYER can decide whether to pick their sprouts or forage them?
  19. Then create, oh, parallel systems so they aren't stacked. Currently, one can acquired orange tree sprouts by either foraging or cutting the sprout from a tree that is sprouting. Those are two parallel systems - not stacked. It didn't have to be one or the other so that when for instance foraging was implemented then sprouts could no longer be cut from trees.
  20. I have to say, I fundamentally don't understand this claim. One of the many little annoyances in Wurm is having to interact with the "tile" instead of with the actual terrain (e.g. you don't actually cut down a tree, but instead "cut down" a tree tile). This new method seems more like actual interaction with less immersion-break than the old foraging/botanizing. A player can now see whether there is something to gather up or not in the actual game view before performing an action rather than in a text log after approaching the tile and performing a [very boring and monotonous to me] action. That said, I also fundamentally do understand the complaint about this not being a new addition but is instead a compulsory replacement. I am not sure how it would be best implemented as a complement rather than replacement, but it doesn't look like a lot of development thought went into how to enhance the current process rather than simply ditch-and-replace. Also, nodes are not quite loot boxes. Yet. . EDIT: Oh, and requiring specialized magical tools in order to get the most out of nodes is a terrible idea.
  21. Actually, I see it the opposite way around - treasure hunting didn't reward exploration, it simply offering an incentive to the non-explorers to get them moving. Resource nodes add a visual element to tile resources, so those who are already out exploring have an enriched method of foraging etc. Whether the results are better or not, I wouldn't know, but a visual cue is IMO better than selecting forage (even with a keybind) on every tile. I do wonder about how cluttered this MIGHT make the landscape look.
  22. "cactus" is very broad. The plant on the right looks like prickly pear - which is indeed a fruiting a cactus. Wouldn't make a bad addition as a new kind of plant, but unlikely now that the model is used for "weeds".
  23. 🙂 I was indeed suggesting basis judgment on what you have actually seen. You can see much of the video (I believe) via a certain 'tuber's channel. By judgment, I meant of the content. I was not suggesting judging anybody at all. The "bullying" claims seem to be predicated on this being directed at the individual, but that certainly is not what I have seen here. I cannot comment on what may be elsewhere that I have not seen, but none of the comments about bullying have mentioned anything specific. I still find it risible that a video that jokes about killing children if they have asthma is considered fine but suggesting that that is in poor taste somehow victimizes the creator of the video.
  24. No, they didn't. The community rightly criticized the content. Interestingly, the polite but impassioned criticism of the content is seen as bullying while the content itself is portrayed as perfectly fine because "just joking".